The Work Product Review (WPR) is a designation requirement intended to provide Candidate Members and CRAs seeking the AACI designation with a better understanding of Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (CUSPAP). The program also aims to assist in maintaining and/or enhancing quality of work while reducing risk liability. The reviews are meant to be a positive learning experience that provide guidance and support to Candidate Members and CRAs while also offering an opportunity for educating the Co-signer and Mentor.
WPR completed by a Designated Member who is a member of the Peer Review Committee trained in peer review assesses a member’s professional work product (appraisal report, review report, or consulting report).
WPR is for educational purposes only and work product submissions, even those with grievous or significant errors, will not be subject to Professional Practice complaints.
|Please submit your completed Work Product Review Submission Form along with your report to Sueann Rogers at AIC national office.|
Effective January 1, 2014
- All new Candidate Members joining AIC January 1, 2014 and after are required to submit three (3) work products in order to attain designation. The submissions are to be staggered throughout the Candidacy. The first two submissions will receive constructive feedback to assist in the Candidate Member’s development. The third and final Candidate Member submission must receive an acceptable review to allow the Candidate Member to register for the Applied Experience (AE) written exam. If the review is unacceptable, the Candidate Member will be required to resubmit the work product. Only after the last submission is submitted and receives an acceptable review will a Candidate Member be deemed eligible to register for the Applied Experience (AE) written exam
- All CRAs proceeding to the AACI designation as of January 1, 2014 will be required to submit two (2) pieces of non-residential work product in order to attain the AACI designation. The submissions are to be staggered throughout their Applied Experience Program (AEP) period. The first submission will receive constructive feedback to assist in the CRA’s development. The final CRA submission must receive an acceptable review to allow the CRA to register for the Applied Experience (AE) written exam. If the review is unacceptable, the CRA will be required to resubmit the work product
The following special considerations have been implemented for Candidate Members and CRAs who have already started the Accreditation process:
- All existing Candidate Members who joined AIC before January 1, 2014 are required to submit one (1) of piece of work product in order to attain designation. The work product must receive an acceptable review in order to be deemed eligible to register for the AE written exam.
- All CRAs proceeding to the AACI designation who registered for the AEP before January 1, 2014 are required to submit one (1) piece of non-residential work product in order to attain the designation. The work product must receive an acceptable review in order to be deemed eligible to register for the AE written exam.
- Exemption: All members who successfully pass the AE written exam before May 1, 2014 will be exempt from the WPR program.
The WPR will be conducted by a National Peer Reviewer and will ensure work product completed and submitted by a CRA or Candidate Member is in compliance with the CUSPAP. Furthermore:
- Each submission should provide evidence of growth and complexity of assignment.
- It is recommended that submissions be made as soon as a Member enters a co-signing relationship and/or during the mentored Applied Experience Program (AEP) with the last submission toward the end of the AE period.
- Each submission should provide a different focus for the report.
During the WPR, the Reviewer will:
- Carefully read the work product in its entirety.
- Conduct a math check (arithmetic, carry forward of figures, etc.).
- Complete a review that focuses on CUSPAP Sections 6 (Rules) and 7 (Comments), and provide comments regarding the work product’s explanation and supporting documentation. In cases of consulting reports, the Reviewer will use CUSPAP Sections 10 and 11 (Consultation Standards) to complete the review.
- Provide comments and educational advice if there are deficiencies found with the work product and how it can be improved in the future.
- Provide advice on grammar, report format, methodologies, etc.